scholarly journals Fracture-related outcome study for operatively treated tibia shaft fractures (F.R.O.S.T.): registry rationale and design

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Willem-Jan Metsemakers ◽  
◽  
Kirsten Kortram ◽  
Nando Ferreira ◽  
Mario Morgenstern ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Tibial shaft fractures (TSFs) are among the most common long bone injuries often resulting from high-energy trauma. To date, musculoskeletal complications such as fracture-related infection (FRI) and compromised fracture healing following fracture fixation of these injuries are still prevalent. The relatively high complication rates prove that, despite advances in modern fracture care, the management of TSFs remains a challenge even in the hands of experienced surgeons. Therefore, the Fracture-Related Outcome Study for operatively treated Tibia shaft fractures (F.R.O.S.T.) aims at creating a registry that enables data mining to gather detailed information to support future clinical decision-making regarding the management of TSF’s. Methods This prospective, international, multicenter, observational registry for TSFs was recently developed. Recruitment started in 2019 and is planned to take 36 months, seeking to enroll a minimum of 1000 patients. The study protocol does not influence the clinical decision-making procedure, implant choice, or surgical/imaging techniques; these are being performed as per local hospital standard of care. Data collected in this registry include injury specifics, treatment details, clinical outcomes (e.g., FRI), patient-reported outcomes, and procedure- or implant-related adverse events. The minimum follow up is 12 months. Discussion Although over the past decades, multiple high-quality studies have addressed individual research questions related to the outcome of TSFs, knowledge gaps remain. The scarcity of data calls for an international high-quality, population-based registry. Creating such a database could optimize strategies intended to prevent severe musculoskeletal complications. The main purpose of the F.R.O.S.T registry is to evaluate the association between different treatment strategies and patient outcomes. It will address not only operative techniques and implant materials but also perioperative preventive measures. For the first time, data concerning systemic perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis, the influence of local antimicrobials, and timing of soft-tissue coverage will be collected at an international level and correlated with standardized outcome measures in a large prospective, multicenter, observational registry for global accessibility. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03598530.

2015 ◽  
Vol 51 ◽  
pp. 378-397 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Bowers ◽  
Tonya Roberts ◽  
Kimberly Nolet ◽  
Brenda Ryther ◽  

Author(s):  
Ethel Weld ◽  
Theodore Bailey ◽  
Catrionia Waitt

Pregnant, or potentially pregnant women have historically been excluded from clinical trials of new medications. However, it is increasingly recognised that it is imperative to generate evidence from the population in whom the drugs are likely to be used in order to inform safe, evidence-based shared clinical decision making. Reluctance by researchers and regulators to perform such studies often relates to concerns about risk, particularly to the fetus. However, this must be offset against the risk of untreated disease or using a drug in pregnancy where safety, efficacy and dosing information are not known. This review summarises the historical perspective, the ethical and legal frameworks which inform the conduct of such research, then highlights examples of innovative practice which have enabled high quality, ethical research to proceed to inform the evidence-based use of medication in pregnancy.


2011 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 121-123
Author(s):  
Jeri A. Logemann

Evidence-based practice requires astute clinicians to blend our best clinical judgment with the best available external evidence and the patient's own values and expectations. Sometimes, we value one more than another during clinical decision-making, though it is never wise to do so, and sometimes other factors that we are unaware of produce unanticipated clinical outcomes. Sometimes, we feel very strongly about one clinical method or another, and hopefully that belief is founded in evidence. Some beliefs, however, are not founded in evidence. The sound use of evidence is the best way to navigate the debates within our field of practice.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document